Most of the articles you sited (thank very much for making them available in one place), cover a lot of ground and don't make much sense. The WSJ one, for instance, talks about greater selectivity among the companies, as if that were contradictory to the existence of shortages. In 2005 computerization in recruitment made it possible for any moron to submit a resume to Microsoft, which then has to spend more time in weeding out the candidates. What does that prove? Only that a recruiter has more second-class resumes to go through; it may still face a shortage of the first-class resumes it is looking for.
The last one is even equally problematic. The author argues, incorrectly, that salaries prove the absence of shortage. But he has not learned his economics properly. Price is indicative only when there is no rationing. Shortage of skill work is rationing. One cannot use the non-rationing tools (price) in situations where rationing exists; this is simply absurd. And yet, that is what the unsuspecting author does.
One of blogs/articles you have kindly made available does inadvertently argue against itself. It sites the fact that more than one half of the science/engineering students are foreign. Right here you can see that graduation data, sites by many opponents, do not apply. "See," they argue, "the number of engineering graduates increased from 72,000 to 81,000 in 1999-2004 -- we don't have any shortages thus." But one half of those graduates do not satisfy the citizenship requirement; we have therefore only 35,000-40,000 of American engineering graduates. Different picture, isn't it? Now the foreign students still apply for jobs, and some get it --- under H1B or some such visa. But now the opponents are railing against those. None of it makes sense. The arguments are supposedly common-sense level (who can argue with prices, for instance?) but are actually fallacious.
Finally, H1B visas cover not only electrical engineers and software specialists. Go to any major university and count the number of Americans in the graduate programs in science, engineering, or business. Count the faculty that teaches in the corresponding departments. I could name for you universities in which there is not a single American-born person in the entire area of teaching/research. Why this is happening can be discussed. But to deny the facts is unproductive.
(To ClearCase_guy and jboot, I cc’d you just in case you are interested.)
TopQuark,
01. Re: your critique of the WSJ article about greater number of resumes being submitted
You are assuming 1. that all the additional resumes are second class; this assumption seems to grow out of your belief that 2. “
there is a huge shortage of workers -— highly skilled ones -— in the U.S. It is somewhat filled by H1B program, but that is a drop in the bucket.” (
post # 35). Neither your belief nor assumption are necessarily true. There could be plenty of older, i.e. > 35 – 40 year old experienced, proven, up to date first class skilled workers submitting their resumes. It is equally likely there is an adequate number, even an abundance of first-class resumes.
02. Re: your critique of the argument that decreased salaries demonstrate no shortage of skilled workers because there could be a shortage of “
skill work”
You have already stated in your
post #35, “
there is a huge shortage of workers -— highly skilled ones -— in the U.S. It is somewhat filled by H1B program, but that is a drop in the bucket”. Is there a huge shortage or not? If there is, why would the author address a “
shortage of skill work“ that is non-existent, and why are salaries decreasing?.
Check
post # 71. Alan Greenspan supports bringing in more skilled workers for the express purpose of reducing salaries.
"Inequality of incomes is the critical area where capitalist systems are most vulnerable," Greenspan said yesterday in Washington at a conference on maintaining the competitiveness of US capital markets convened by Treasury Secretary Henry Paulson. "You cannot have a system that we have unless the people who participate in it believe it is just.
Allowing more skilled workers into the country would bring down the salaries of top earners in the United States, easing tensions over the mounting wage gap, Greenspan said."
3. Re: your comment on the article that
“does inadvertently argue against itself “. Again you seem to have an underlying assumption that the US needs more that 40,000 new engineering graduates per year. How many new graduates in engineering do we need each year? How was this figure determined?
4. You are correct that H-1B visas cover not only” electrical engineers and software specialists”. They are also issued for Doctors, Nurses, Med-Techs, Therapists, Pharmacists, Teachers, College Professors, Accountants, Executives, Managers, Administrators, Lawyers, Tax Analysts, Surgical and Dental Assistants, Youth Counselors, Day Care Workers, Cashiers …
In 2005 ~ 1/3 of the
efiled H-1B visas (totaling 307,779) were for job codes in computer related services (114,293). This number does not include occupations in architecture, engineering, surveying, mathematics, or the physical sciences.
In addition to the commonly cited H-1B visa, there is an entire alphabet soup of visas used to bring skilled workers into the US. They include, but are not limited to, B-1, B-2, E-3, EB-2, EB-3, F-1, OPT, H-3, J-1, L-1A, L-1B, O-1, TN. (F.Y.I. The H-1B visa is the most commonly one used for study, because it has the most complete data available from the government.)